Carney trapped between big oil and international law
World Court paves ways for climate claims
Good morning – Here is your weekend newsletter.
In peace,
Steve
A ruling this week from the International Court of Justice could spell trouble for Canada and our lacklustre track record combatting climate change.
Prime Minister Carney has ambitious plans to expand the oil and gas industry, but the International Court of Justice is paving the way for big financial claims against Canada for promoting climate change, according to an expert on international law.
Pay now, or pay more later
Our friend Prof. Michael Byers, based at the University of British Columbia, says it comes down to this:
“Pay now, or pay more later.”
That’s the message sent by the International Court of Justice to fossil fuel-producing countries such as Canada in an “advisory opinion” on climate change released last week.
For decades, Canada has been a free rider, benefitting from the efforts of others to transition away from fossil fuels while doing little ourselves, says Byers. We’ve been free-riding because of deeply entrenched interests, mostly in the oil and gas industry, but also in the financial sector, as well as federal and provincial governments.
Read the original article:
The International Court of Justice’s statement on fossil fuels puts Carney in a tough spot by Michael Byers, Special to The Globe and Mail, published July 28, 2025
The Court says, “Failure of the state to take appropriate action to protect the climate system from GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions including through fossil fuel production, fossil fuel consumption, the granting of fossil fuel exploration licenses, or the provision of fossil fuel subsidies may constitute an internationally wrongful act which is attributable to that state.” (my emphasis)
Expensive claims on the way
The opinion gives a legal boost to developing countries who have demanded compensation for decades for the costs of dealing with expensive climate disasters, primarily caused by the policies of wealthy countries.
For Canadian oil and gas companies, it means that a wave of climate-damage cases could soon be headed their way, in domestic courts in Canada and around the world.
Big Oil vs International Law
Writing in The Globe and Mail, Byers says this legal finding creates stark choices for the Canadian government; “It means eliminating supports for the oil and gas industry now, or risking having to pay hundreds of billions of dollars in compensation to developing countries later.”
A path forward for Carney
Byers says that Carney must feel that he’s stuck between a rock and a hard place. But with courage and resolve, there is a way out.
No more fossil fuel projects. The Prime Minister should not include fossil fuel projects in his infrastructure priorities. This includes liquefied natural gas plants, the Northern Gateway oil pipeline to the Pacific coast, and carbon sequestration projects (which most climate experts agree are industry greenwashing).
End government subsidies. The responsible thing to do after this advisory opinion would be for all subsidies for the oil and gas sector to be phased out, including industry-specific tax breaks.
Continued inaction will only make things worse. The International Court of Justice has done us a favour by reminding us of this, says Byers. “The well-respected Prime Minister is uniquely positioned to educate the public about the climate crisis – and the hard choices and big changes it requires.”
Leave a comment explaining your vote.
PeaceQuest is a proud co-sponsor of Hiroshima Day events in Toronto.
Keeping promises divides readers
PeaceQuest readers are divided over whether politicians can break promises in a crisis.
Last week I asked you, “Is it OK for politicians to break promises in the event of an unexpected crisis?” A slight majority said it might be OK to break promises in an unexpected crisis (51%), but many said “No” (40%) or they didn’t know/unsure (9%).
Did you miss last week’s newsletter?
Viewed 2.2k times
Thank you for everything you do for peace. If you support PeaceQuest’s peace education impact, please consider becoming a paid subscriber for $5.50 per month, or $55 annually (an 18% savings).
Steve
I have not changed my opinion because I have always advocated, both financially and politically, for policies that promote green energy and environmental protection on the land, the seas, and in the air. An oil-focused approach in economics is short-sighted and entirely life-threatening.
I have always had a deep concern about climate change and that will never change.